Police Oversight - Backgrounder

The police play a very important role in Canadian society. With the
powers that have been granted to them by the electorate, they
investigate criminal activity and they enforce the laws that are
created by the democratically elected members of Parliament and the
Legislature. For many people, the image of the police officer is a
comforting one; it is an image of the brave fellow-citizen who has put
him or herself at potential risk in order to "serve and protect” the
members of the community. At a recent meeting of the Canadian
Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement (CACOLE),
participants agreed that, "Canadians in general and British Columbians
in particular, are very fortunate to be so well-policed and that we
enjoy police forces that are universally respected for their competence
and professionalism.”[1]These words are not to suggest, however, that the system in which we live is above reproach.

Indeed, not all people share this image of law enforcement and, even
amongst those who do, it is known that not all police officers always
live by the same laws that they are charged with upholding. In recent
years, and throughout history, there have been many stories and
allegations of abuses committed by police officers in Canada. Given the
breadth of the powers that are entrusted to the police, the question of
police oversight is a particularly important one.

Specific Example of Recent Alleged Police MisconductThe year is 2005. A twenty-two year old man is caught drinking beer
outside a hockey arena in Houston, B.C. After giving the R.C.M.P. a
false name, he is put in the back of a police car and taken to the
police station. Twenty minutes later, Ian Bush lies on the floor, dead,
having been shot in the back of the head.

It's a cold January night. Three suspected drug dealers with lengthy
criminal records are removed from the Granville Street Mall area in
Vancouver, BC. The police take them to Stanley Park where, one by one,
they are taken out of the police vehicle and beaten.

One night, a young aboriginal man is taken on a "starlight tour”,
which is to say that he is driven to the outskirts of Saskatoon by two
police officers and abandoned in the sub-zero temperatures of the
Saskatchewan night. The chief of police admits that this is not an
isolated incident.
[2]Over the years, several aboriginal men are found frozen to death on the
outskirts of town. A similar incident occurs in Merritt, British
Columbia when an aboriginal man is beaten by police and left in the
bush. [3] He survives.

Two off-duty R.C.M.P. officers leave a lower-mainland bar one night,
highly intoxicated. The two officers proceeded to assault three men and
to falsely identify themselves as Port Coquitlam Police and as
undercover police agents.

Who is affected by police misconduct?While police misconduct can negatively and directly affect any
member of society, it is not true that everyone has the same likelihood
of being affected. It has been documented that police misconduct of the
violent sort disproportionately targets aboriginal people, people from
marginalized ethnic communities and/or people living on low-incomes. [4]

Policing and Oversight in British ColumbiaThe provision of policing services in British Columbia is delivered
by: 1) municipal police forces, 2) tribal police forces, and 3) the
RCMP. When a complaint is lodged against a member of a police force or
the force itself, the process employed to investigate and resolve the
complaint is monitored by one of two institutions that provide civilian
oversight in the province. Municipal and some tribal police forces are
subject to the oversight of the Office of the Police Complaint
Commissioner while concerns about the conduct of the RCMP are directed
to the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.

Office of the Police Complaint Commissioner (OPCC)The Police Complaint Commission is an independent civilian
organization that is accountable to the Legislature of British
Columbia. It is responsible for overseeing 15 municipal and tribal
police forces such as the Nelson City Police Department, the Vancouver
Police Department, Stl"atl'imx Tribal Police Services, and the Victoria
Police Department.

The Commissioner has a number of duties. Among these are: overseeing
the complaints process regarding municipal/tribal police forces, their
policies, and their officers; receiving and tracking complaints;
compiling data regarding lodged complaints, and; regular reporting to
the public regarding complaints and the complaint process.

In order to fulfill these duties, she or he may takes such steps as
researching and issuing recommendations on any aspect of the police
complaints process, recommending a public inquiry, or suggesting to
Crown Counsel that criminal charges be laid against a police officer.

Any individual can lodge a complaint in person, by fax, by phone, by
email or by mail to the OPCC. Alternatively, they can lodge the
complaint at any municipal police department information desk. While
this initial report may be made in any of these forms, a complainant
ultimately needs to fill out a Form 1 Record of Complaint. If the form
is received by the OPCC, the complaint is forwarded to the Chief
Constable of the department that is, or whose member is, the object of
the complaint. Similarly, if the complaint is made at a police
department, the Form 1 is forwarded to the OPCC. Any investigation
should be completed within six months of this time.

There are three types of complaints under the Police Act:
service or policy complaints, internal discipline complaints, and
public trust complaints. Complaints about the service of a department
or its policies are addressed by the local police board, who must
report findings and a summary of any action taken to the OPCC. When
there is an allegation against an officer that does not affect the
relationship between the police and the public, it is deemed an
internal discipline matter and is addressed accordingly.

A public trust complaint can be resolved in one of three ways:
summary dismissal, informal resolution, or an investigation. The Chief
Constable of the police department where the complaint originates can
summarily dismiss the complaint where it is deemed baseless or where it
was filed more than a year after the incident that forms the basis of
the complaint. Where a complaint is dismissed, the decision to do so
may be reviewed by the OPCC. It is also possible for the complainant
and respondent to come to an informal resolution and to settle the
complaint by signing a letter of agreement. Finally, a complaint may be
investigated through an internal investigation or, in some rare cases,
by an external investigator.

Policing is subject to the oversight of the courts and any criminal
activity will be addressed in that arena. In the context of the OPCC
work, any disciplinary action will be in relation to the employment of
the officer(s) whose conduct is being questioned. Such discipline may
include a written reprimand, a suspension, a reduction in rank, or a
dismissal. If this investigation does not lead to satisfactory
resolution for the complainant, they can apply to the OPCC to recommend
a public hearing. This decision may also be made by the OPCC without
having received an application.

In 2006, the OPCC received nearly 600 complaint forms, 85% of which
included public trust complaints. That same year, just over 1000
complaints were concluded. Of those, 59 were withdrawn, 211 were
summarily dismissed, 618 were found to be unsubstantiated, and 54 were
substantiated. The majority of the rest were concluded through informal
resolution. [5]

There are limitations to the work that the OPCC can do. One of the
most often-mentioned limitations is in relation to the investigation
process. The practice of internally investigating complaints raises
concerns in two key regards. First, there is the concern that there
will be a perception of bias in having people investigate members of
their own police force. Public confidence in the police is important
and that confidence will waiver where there does not appear to be any
accountability. Second, it has been suggested that, in fact, internal
investigations do not always lead to complete and fair investigations.
In a recent review of the police complaints process, former B.C. Court
of Appeal justice Josiah Wood QC recommended greater powers for the
OPCC to investigate and to monitor internal investigations. In his
study, the former justice found that, while 80% of investigations were
adequately carried out, the one in five that aren"t adequately done
were generally in regard to the more serious breaches of the public
trust. [6] Whether the government decides to adopt the recommendations of this report waits to be seen.

The Commission for Public Complaints Against the R.C.M.P.The Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP (CPC) provides
a similar service with respect to the RCMP as that provided by the OPCC
with respect to municipal police forces. Like the OPCC, the CPC is a
product of a statute passed by an elected body and is responsible to
that body (the Parliament in this case). The CPC oversees all RCMP
policing activity but does not have any power in regard to the RCMP
national security powers. The National Security activities of the RCMP
are not subject to civilian oversight of any kind. Whether this lack of
oversight is appropriate in a free and democratic society is the topic
of a great deal of debate.

The complaint process at the CPC is similar to that found at the
OPCC. Once a complaint is received, the RCMP conducts an internal
investigation and reports to the complainant. There may also be a
process of mediation in an effort to reach an informal resolution of
the complaint. If the complainant is satisfied with the RCMP report,
the process ends and the complaint is closed. If the complainant is
unsatisfied, a complainant can request a review by the CPC. Upon
review, if the Chair of the CPC finds that the report is satisfactory,
the process ends. If, however, the Chair is unsatisfied, they may take
a number of steps including: conducting a review of the complaint
without any further investigation; requesting that the RCMP investigate
further, initiating an investigation on behalf of the CPC, and holding
a public hearing. During a review, an interim report will be prepared
by the CPC and sent to the RCMP Commissioner. Ultimately, once the
process is at an end, a final report is sent to the RCMP Commissioner,
the Minister of Public Safety and the complainant. None of the reports
prepared by the CPC are binding on the RCMP.

ConclusionIn order to place into check the vast powers granted to the police,
and in order to maintain public confidence in the police, it is
important that there is civilian oversight of the individual officers
and of the departments. In British Columbia, the OPCC and the CPC
provide that service. In both the context of municipal and federal
policing, it has recently been noted that the majority of internal
investigations are conducted in a fair and just manner. However, there
are also those that are not seen to lead to a just result. What balance
should be struck to ensure the adequacy of civilian oversight? Should
recommendations be binding on the police? Does this undermine the
authority of a police chief? Should internal investigations ever be
permitted? These and other questions will continue to be debated until
that balance is reached.